3 ms·

This is kind of a weird take. If everyone is driven by profit, but some get it by evil means and others get it by doing things that benefit their customers, ca

This is kind of a weird take. If everyone is driven by profit, but some get it by evil means and others get it by doing things that benefit their customers, can’t we simply say that the people who do evil stuff are evil, and the ones who don’t aren’t?

cromka 4y ago
I guess I should have stressed the "look" part a bit more.
- newtritious 4y ago
  The implication being that they only ‘look’ like they are not evil, but secretly they actually are?
  - cromka 4y ago
    Not that they are completely evil, just that they know how to play the public and shareholders to come off as future-oriented, sustainable, humane, etc., which gives them some leeway to deal with their issues in China for example.
    - newtritious 4y ago
      Again the innuendo. You are agreeing that they are behaving in a sustainable, future-oriented, sustainable, humane way, but presenting this as if it’s not actually true. The fact that China hasn’t improved on human rights the way everyone expected them to do over the last two decades is indeed a problem for Apple, and everyone else who does business there, but it doesn’t change the fact that they are in fact making their phones more repairable, which is beneficial to the environment and consumers in reality, and not just in appearance.
      - cromka 4y ago
        > the fact that they are in fact making their phones more repairable, which is beneficial to the environment and consumers in reality, and not just in appearance. The pure fact that they aren't advertising such obvious user-benefiting feature corroborates my hypothesis that they only virtue-signal what they find milkable. Fundamentally, they are making iPhones more repairable a result of the US and the EU being on their asses with various legislation; it's a mere compliance. Advertising it would likely affect their AppleCare+ revenue, which is why I presume they simply didn't. If they actually cared about being a better company for the sake of being a better company, they would absolutely point out that obvious benefit even at the risk of diminishing their future AppleCare+ revenue. So, in short, those repairability improvements are mostly to comply and save their own expenses when fixing AppleCare-insured phones. Which is what I meant by it being mostly for the looks. They just know how to play their cards well. > which is beneficial to the environment and consumers in reality, and not just in appearance. Nobody said it wasn't, that wasn't the point I was arguing.
kaba0 4y ago
I don’t know, is a paper clip AI evil of not? I think your problem is anthropomorphizing a non-human entity — companies after a certain size are simply trying to maximize profits at all costs. It is just so happens that people like to look at companies in a human way and thus playing “good” has a monetary advantage. For a more direct example look at all the companies putting up pro-LGBT flags.
- newtritious 4y ago
  > companies after a certain size are simply trying to maximize profits at all costs. This is an ideological claim that doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. Obviously if you hold this as an axiom, you won’t be able to see that companies are made up of people. Are you aware that Tim Cook is gay? Could it be that his personal experience has something to do with Apple supporting gay rights? If your claim has any truth, then all companies above a certain size would be putting up pro-LGBT flags.
  - kaba0 4y ago
    Aren’t they? Most user-facing companies did actually put up banners like that. Of course it is not a requirement if only other companies are your clients, here public opinion doesn’t have direct monetary correlation.
    - newtritious 4y ago
      Did they? I’ve hardly ever seen such banners. Only reporting on them. But in any case, there is no point in further discussion with you since you have stated your ideology.

cromka 4y ago

I guess I should have stressed the "look" part a bit more.

newtritious 4y ago
The implication being that they only ‘look’ like they are not evil, but secretly they actually are?
- cromka 4y ago
  Not that they are completely evil, just that they know how to play the public and shareholders to come off as future-oriented, sustainable, humane, etc., which gives them some leeway to deal with their issues in China for example.
  - newtritious 4y ago
    Again the innuendo. You are agreeing that they are behaving in a sustainable, future-oriented, sustainable, humane way, but presenting this as if it’s not actually true. The fact that China hasn’t improved on human rights the way everyone expected them to do over the last two decades is indeed a problem for Apple, and everyone else who does business there, but it doesn’t change the fact that they are in fact making their phones more repairable, which is beneficial to the environment and consumers in reality, and not just in appearance.
    - cromka 4y ago
      > the fact that they are in fact making their phones more repairable, which is beneficial to the environment and consumers in reality, and not just in appearance. The pure fact that they aren't advertising such obvious user-benefiting feature corroborates my hypothesis that they only virtue-signal what they find milkable. Fundamentally, they are making iPhones more repairable a result of the US and the EU being on their asses with various legislation; it's a mere compliance. Advertising it would likely affect their AppleCare+ revenue, which is why I presume they simply didn't. If they actually cared about being a better company for the sake of being a better company, they would absolutely point out that obvious benefit even at the risk of diminishing their future AppleCare+ revenue. So, in short, those repairability improvements are mostly to comply and save their own expenses when fixing AppleCare-insured phones. Which is what I meant by it being mostly for the looks. They just know how to play their cards well. > which is beneficial to the environment and consumers in reality, and not just in appearance. Nobody said it wasn't, that wasn't the point I was arguing.

kaba0 4y ago

I don’t know, is a paper clip AI evil of not? I think your problem is anthropomorphizing a non-human entity — companies after a certain size are simply trying to maximize profits at all costs. It is just so happens that people like to look at companies in a human way and thus playing “good” has a monetary advantage. For a more direct example look at all the companies putting up pro-LGBT flags.

newtritious 4y ago
> companies after a certain size are simply trying to maximize profits at all costs. This is an ideological claim that doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. Obviously if you hold this as an axiom, you won’t be able to see that companies are made up of people. Are you aware that Tim Cook is gay? Could it be that his personal experience has something to do with Apple supporting gay rights? If your claim has any truth, then all companies above a certain size would be putting up pro-LGBT flags.
- kaba0 4y ago
  Aren’t they? Most user-facing companies did actually put up banners like that. Of course it is not a requirement if only other companies are your clients, here public opinion doesn’t have direct monetary correlation.
  - newtritious 4y ago
    Did they? I’ve hardly ever seen such banners. Only reporting on them. But in any case, there is no point in further discussion with you since you have stated your ideology.